Stetzel v. Holubek

Filing 40

MINUTE ORDER denying 38 Motion for Authorization for Correspondence; denying 39 Motion to Compel Production of Records by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 6/23/2015.(mdave, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01875-MEH
PHILIP E. STETZEL,
Plaintiff,
v.
TIFFANI HOLUBEK,
Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on June 23, 2015.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compell [sic] Production of Records [filed June 22, 2015; docket #39]
is denied without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with D.C. Colo. LCivR 37.1: “A
motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 or 37 directed to an interrogatory, request, and response under Fed.
R. Civ. P. 33, 34, or 36 shall set forth either in the text of the motion or in an exhibit to the motion
the specific interrogatory, request, or response to which the motion is directed.” Id. (emphasis
added).
Plaintiff’s Motion for Authorization for Correspondence [filed June 22, 2015; docket #40]
is denied. Plaintiff provides no legal support for his request seeking an order overriding a “facilitywide ban on inmate-to-inmate correspondence” and authorizing the Plaintiff’s “clearance” to contact
inmates in other facilities. See D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1(d). Moreover, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915,
the Court is authorized only to pay the costs of service of process, printing a record for appeal, and
preparing a transcript of court records; accordingly, Plaintiff’s requests for payment of and credit
for costs for copies is denied.